During an SGUnited Skills Programme preview I attended, one of the participants inquired
if students could work ad hoc to supplement their $1,200 monthly allowance outside course hours.
The course provider responded ambiguously that there may be repercussions if an audit is carried out.
I interpreted this as students having to pay back the full course fees (amounting to $34,500 for that course), plus any allowances that they might have received if they were subsequently found to be ineligible.
The $1,200 allowance is insufficient to meet the living expenses of many families. Stopping those on the course from taking on ad hoc employment - if the additional commitments do not affect academic performance - seems to go against the spirit behind these programmes.
I appeal to the relevant authorities to clarify this stand.
Eric Chen Yixiong